TY - JOUR
T1 - A Mystery Tale
T2 - Nickel Is Fickle When Snails Fail—Investigating the Variability in Ni Toxicity to the Great Pond Snail
AU - Crémazy, Anne
AU - Brix, Kevin V.
AU - Smith, D. Scott
AU - Chen, Weibin
AU - Grosell, Martin
AU - Schlekat, Christian E.
AU - Garman, Emily R.
AU - Middleton, Elizabeth T.
AU - Wood, Chris M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Support for the present study was provided from EcoTox for KV Brix, from an NSERC Discovery Grant (RGPIN‐2017‐03843) for CM Wood, and from NiPERA for A Crémazy and DS Smith. This work was performed as a background study to a project on metal mixture toxicity to Lymnaea stagnalis funded by an NSERC CRD grant to CM Wood and S Niyogi (University of Saskatchewan), with cofunding from NiPERA, the International Zinc Association (IZA), the Copper Development Association (CDA), the International Copper Association (ICA), and Rio Tinto. We also thank Ora Johannsson for her useful comments. Finally, we are grateful to 3 reviewers for providing valuable comments and suggestions that improved the present paper.
PY - 2020/11/1
Y1 - 2020/11/1
N2 - Dissolved Ni concentrations inhibiting the growth of juvenile great pond snails (Lymnaea stagnalis) have been documented to vary from about 1 to 200 µg L−1 Ni. This variability makes L. stagnalis either a moderately sensitive or the most sensitive freshwater species to chronic Ni exposure tested to date. Given the role of sensitive species in environmental risk assessment frameworks, it is particularly important to understand this variability, i.e., to characterize the factors that modulate Ni toxicity and that may confound toxicity test outcomes when uncontrolled. In the present study, we tested if this variability was due to analytical (growth calculation: biomass versus growth rate), environmental (water quality), lab-specific practices, and/or snail population differences among earlier studies. Specifically, we reanalyzed previously published Ni toxicity data and conducted additional measurements of Ni aqueous speciation, short-term Ni uptake, and chronic Ni toxicity with test waters and snail cultures used in previous studies. Corrections for Ni bioavailability and growth calculations explained a large degree of variability in the published literature. However, a residual 16-fold difference remained puzzling between 2 studies: Niyogi et al. (2014) (low ECxs) and Crémazy et al. (2018) (high ECxs). Indeed, differences in metal bioavailability due to water chemistry, lab-specific practices, and snail population sensitivity could not explain the large variation in Ni toxicity in these 2 very similar studies. Other potentially important toxicity-modifying factors were not directly evaluated in the present work: test duration, diet, snail holding conditions, and snail age at onset of testing. The present analysis highlights the need for further studies to elucidate 1) the mechanisms of growth inhibition in Ni-exposed L. stagnalis and 2) the important abiotic and biotic factors affecting this biological response. Until these processes are understood, substantial uncertainties will remain about inclusion of this species in Ni environmental risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;16:983–997.
AB - Dissolved Ni concentrations inhibiting the growth of juvenile great pond snails (Lymnaea stagnalis) have been documented to vary from about 1 to 200 µg L−1 Ni. This variability makes L. stagnalis either a moderately sensitive or the most sensitive freshwater species to chronic Ni exposure tested to date. Given the role of sensitive species in environmental risk assessment frameworks, it is particularly important to understand this variability, i.e., to characterize the factors that modulate Ni toxicity and that may confound toxicity test outcomes when uncontrolled. In the present study, we tested if this variability was due to analytical (growth calculation: biomass versus growth rate), environmental (water quality), lab-specific practices, and/or snail population differences among earlier studies. Specifically, we reanalyzed previously published Ni toxicity data and conducted additional measurements of Ni aqueous speciation, short-term Ni uptake, and chronic Ni toxicity with test waters and snail cultures used in previous studies. Corrections for Ni bioavailability and growth calculations explained a large degree of variability in the published literature. However, a residual 16-fold difference remained puzzling between 2 studies: Niyogi et al. (2014) (low ECxs) and Crémazy et al. (2018) (high ECxs). Indeed, differences in metal bioavailability due to water chemistry, lab-specific practices, and snail population sensitivity could not explain the large variation in Ni toxicity in these 2 very similar studies. Other potentially important toxicity-modifying factors were not directly evaluated in the present work: test duration, diet, snail holding conditions, and snail age at onset of testing. The present analysis highlights the need for further studies to elucidate 1) the mechanisms of growth inhibition in Ni-exposed L. stagnalis and 2) the important abiotic and biotic factors affecting this biological response. Until these processes are understood, substantial uncertainties will remain about inclusion of this species in Ni environmental risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;16:983–997.
KW - Bioavailability
KW - Chronic toxicity
KW - Freshwater
KW - Growth inhibition
KW - Lymnaea stagnalis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089974646&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85089974646&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ieam.4300
DO - 10.1002/ieam.4300
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85089974646
VL - 16
SP - 983
EP - 997
JO - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
JF - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
SN - 1551-3777
IS - 6
ER -